Realty TV star lands on Vogue cover

Posted on March 21, 2014 by Nicole Lopez-Alvar

By NICOLE LOPEZ-ALVAR

After months of speculation, the day is finally here—Kim Kardashian is on the cover of the reputable Vogue magazine.

Yes, it’s true. A notoriously famous reality star turned model and businesswoman is posing for the most famous fashion magazine of the 21^st century.

The Internet has been in frenzy from posts ranging from the overly ecstatic to the mournfully dreadful. This is due to the star’s not-so-common start in the entertainment business, and most likely, the fact that she is posing with her fiancé, Kanye West.

Due to the Internet, fans and “haters” are able to soak up Vogue’s April issue with the dynamic duo through multiple platforms. These range from Twitter announcements and posts about the spread, to an in-depth video of the making of the photo shoot.

An example of said media advertising started immediately with Kim’s Instagram post on Friday. She posted onto her Instagram account stating, “This is such a dream come true!!! Thank you @VogueMagazine for this cover! O M GGGGGG!!! I can’t even breath!” The post was linked to a photograph of the magazine cover, as well as the vogue.com article itself. No less than six hours later, the post has generated 547,495 “likes” and the numbers keep on rolling in.

These sources of excessive insight are the ingenious ways magazines like Vogue use social media to promote their stories instantaneously around the world. Therefore, for celebrities, such as Kim Kardashian and Kanye West, the hysteria on social media only makes the story surface more Web sites, more smart phones, and more bank accounts.

What makes this cover story relevant is the subtle hashtag underneath the caption of the photograph, which states “#worldsmosttalkedaboutcouple.” While this statement is a vast exaggeration, the hashtag serves two purposes — a clever nod to the fact that the couple’s Instagram followers combined ad up to 20 million, as well as a subtle advertisement for the social media sites that use such hashtags so people can follow the story and discuss it in an organized fashion.

Nowadays, through the use of social media, stars as hated as they are loved like Kim Kardashian, can cover more than one platform.

Overall, business models that incorporate social media are helping everyone involved generate more business and more income, while we sit here and continue to stalk the couple’s baby, North, on Kim’s Instagram page.

Uproar against ‘upskirting’

Posted on March 6, 2014 by Jenna Johnson

By JENNA JOHNSON

The highest court of Massachusetts ruled Wednesday that it was not illegal to take photos up the skirts of women without them knowing. And the decision is getting a lot of news media attention today.

Massachusetts Supreme Court Justice Margot Bostford of the said that these “upskirt” photographs were not technically against the law because technically the women were not nude or partially nude.

The ruling was based on the court case about Michael Robinson, 32, who was arrested in 2010 after being accused of taking cell phone photographs and videos up the skirts of women while riding Boston transportation. Police arranged a decoy operation that caught Robinson in the act. Wednesday’s ruling reversed one by a lower court that denied Robinson’s motion to dismiss the case, according to CNN.

After the decision was announced, social media exploded against “upskirting.” Citizens claimed the right to privacy beneath their own clothing.

A slew of prosecutors and lawmakers disagree with the decision and are trying to change the law, agreeing that the technicalities of the law violate the spirit of protecting privacy.

It seems like the Massachusetts court system has some explaining to do.

Right now, the state has various wiretapping laws in place. According to the Digital Media Law Project, it is illegal in Massachusetts to secretly record a conversation, whether in person or by another medium. All parties must be informed of the recording in a conversation or telephone call. If the parties do not wish to be recorded, they have a right to leave the conversation.

But, it is legal to secretly snap photos of their underwear.

Maybe it’s just me, but I’ll give my consent to be recorded on tape rather than have someone sneak a few photos up my skirt without me knowing. Of course the privacy of conversations is important, but how can the courts assume that undergarments aren’t private too?

“Upskirting” is not only a violation of privacy, but also demeaning to women. Upskirters (if that’s a word now) should be aware that if they get caught, they may not be charged with violating privacy, but will likely be slapped with a sexual harassment lawsuit.

What goes up, must come down, just like the law on “Upskirting.”

Websites push us to ‘pay attention’

Posted on March 3, 2014 by Nicole Hood

By NICOLE HOOD

With the Olympic Games, world news has attracted a new sort of spotlight. Controversy over South Africa’s gold medal winner Oscar Pistorius’ murder trial has brought Africa’s trial system into this spotlight and, subsequently, post-apartheid matters and conflict.

This is, by far, minor news compared to stories of dangerous protests and political meltdowns in Venezuela, Ukraine, Syria and Thailand. World news websites explicitly display videos and pictures of beaten protestors and tortured prisoners in an attempt to show, rather than tell, the horrors that are happening in parts of the world most people don’t ever really think about.

This takeover of news websites by world news gives me hope that the world today — all the people, consumed by day-to-day problems like bad drivers, test grades, piles of paperwork or long lines — will, in the midst of all the current international chaos, take a step back and at least acknowledge what is happening around the world.

Living in the United States, we have advantages that other countries don’t have: geographically, most countries have to cross the sea to get to us militarily; and the U.S. holds more than half of the entire world’s military power, keeping us safe and comfortable. Because of our strength and location, most of the younger generation in the United States do not even glance at the conflicts in European, Middle Eastern and Asian countries. The generation of our parents had to face the Cold War, but, as their children, we have not faced the immediate danger of an impending war and have no idea what the terrors of war could be like.

All of the sudden, though, front pages preview all kinds of internationally based stories: death, violence, and dangerous government reform protests in Ukraine, Venezuela, and Syria, Russia’s ‘declaration of war’ on Ukraine, North Korea’s missile launches, terrorist attacks in China, and radical groups dropping bombs in Nigeria. While not all of these attract the same amount of attention, the complete political meltdowns in Ukraine, Venezuela and Syria have attracted the gaze of those distracted American eyes.

Now, several writers on the Internet are calling on us to pay attention and help, saying that now there are so many conflicts that we cannot ignore them — saying that we have to take a stance on what’s happening. I believe that this is a growing trend and it has incredible potential. The younger generation is picking up on these articles and posting them on Facebook for their friends to notice. These articles call for my generation not only to take a stance but also to be passionate about it — to be passionate about it enough to at least educate others about the problem.

One article mentioned how my generation likes to liken itself to the generation of the 1960s, of Woodstock, peace and “flower power.” While we have our own form of Woodstock, while we carry the same “one love” attitude to these festivals, we are not them by any means. ‘They protested the Vietnam war, led a sexual revolution, fought for women’s rights and civil rights and changed the landscape of America for good.

We watch Netflix a lot and claim to be hipsters, but are okay with our alternative culture to be entirely superficial, free of substance or meaning. But we could be true hipsters, if we tried. There’s a lot that should be upsetting enough for us to integrate actual ideals and principles to our way of life beyond wearing boots in 80-degree weather and listening to music that sounds nothing like music.

I have one thing to say to these writers: preach on. Good luck, because in the midst of chaos, someone should be preaching about the problems that the world is facing. Maybe these articles on the Internet have more power than the writers think they do because they push for peaceful action, for standing up for what we say we do and for, at least, knowledge.

For more information, go to:

http://www.adolescentpress.com/2/post/2014/02/5-things-that-should-piss-every-teenager-off.html

Nasty e-mail causes controversy

Posted on February 28, 2014 by Taylor Hoff

By TAYLOR HOFF

The popular website LinkedIn is designed to help people in the professional world establish their profile and search for future employees they can trust and who obtain needed credentials. This is a website where reaching out to others is encouraged and either you get the job, or not, no harm in trying.

However, if you’re reaching out to Kelly Blazek, there is in fact harm in trying.

Last week, Kelly Blazek, a woman named Cleveland’s “Communicator of the Year” for her popular online job bank for marketing professionals, realized the importance of playing it safe on social media – the hard way.

Ever since e-mail, Facebook, Twitter, and social media became popular high schoolers, college kids, and young adults were warned of the consequences these websites could have on your future. Making sure no questionable activity surfaces to potential future employers. However, once you get the job, it doesn’t mean you can let down your guard and inappropriately use social media.

When 26-year-old Diana Mekota added Blazek, she received quite the backlash.

After e-mailing her a professional note stating only her experiences and positive job seeking attitude, Mekota was expecting an e-mail of subtle rejection, an e-mail of acceptance, or no e-mail at all. What she got was unexpected by all.

Only hours after Mekota sent her original e-mail, she received an e-mail detailing how her “invite to connect is inappropriate, beneficial only to you, and tacky.” She continued on, “wow, I cannot wait to let every 26-year-old job-seeker mine my top-tier marketing connections to help them land a job.”

Within days the e-mail went viral. Surfacing on websites such as Buzzfeed, known for their humor and poking fun at outrageous situations.

Also within days, other people began coming out of the works claiming to have received similar e-mails from Blazek. In one of the e-mails she signed off “Done with this conversation, and you.”

Blazek’s responses have created quite the frenzy in the media and she has since publicly apologized to all that she offended and deleted several forms of social media.

Although unfortunate to all involved, and potentially Blazek’s career, she has definitely made an example of herself. She proven it’s not only important to have a clean and reputable online appearance when seeking a job, but unquestionably important to maintain that appearance even when you’ve received your dream job and hold titles such as “Communicator of the Year.”

Can social media end marriages?

Posted on February 28, 2014 by Kyla Thorpe

By KYLA THORPE

Paula Patton announced her separation from her husband of eight years, Robin Thicke on Monday.

This came as a shock to many, as these two usually seem to be happy and in love.

Many sites are rumoring that the split is because of Thicke’s behavior with Miley Cyrus during the MTV Video Music Awards last August. Apparently, the whole “twerking” thing didn’t go over well with Patton.

Now, I’m not saying necessarily that he should or should not have participated with Cyrus in the raunchy performance. While both he and Cyrus received a lot of backlash from groups ranging from parents to feminists, the performance caught a lot of attention — which is good in Hollywood.

Being an actress herself, I don’t feel like merely the performance would have upset Patton to such a degree. She understands that, as an entertainer, you have to entertain. I feel like to way it blew up afterwards, might’ve driven her to this point.

At first, she had claimed to not have been bothered by the performance, even liking it. That was just the morning after. Days, even weeks later, people were tweeting, reading, and seeing commentary of the performance on the news.

However, Patton truly felt about the performance originally, she felt 10 times worse after it blew up on social media.

I’ve heard about marriages breaking up over social media before, but many times it’s because one person in the relationship is found to be talking to someone else online, leaving inappropriate comments on pictures, and so forth.

This is a new aspect on the matter, however, because it would appear that Patton was humiliated after the performance when it went rampantly viral, changing her mind about being okay with it and pulling the plug on the marriage.

Granted, marriages aren’t perfect and there are always other things happening behind the scenes that could’ve ended this one, but this whole situation is a great example of how social media can follow you everywhere and eventually become your downfall.

Violent backlash against Google Glass

Posted on February 26, 2014 by Jenna Johnson

By JENNA JOHNSON

The latest innovation from Google, the Google Glass eyepiece has recently caused quite a stir regarding the recording function of the device. Sarah Slocum, a tech writer, was allegedly harassed at a San Francisco bar for recording people with her Google Glass.

According to Slocum, the “Google Glass haters” gave her an obscene gesture, after which she turned on the record function of the device. She told them she was doing so and one man “ripped the Google Glass off [her] face and ran out of the bar.” The others reportedly robbed her of her phone and purse.

It is probably important to remember that the incident took place during the last call at a punk rock bar where the beer was flowing and the common sense was probably not. Still, it is interesting to note that both parties involved in Slocum vs. the “Google Glass Haters” reacted violently over a video recording that lasted barely more than 10 seconds.

We live in an age where many breaking news story videos are footage shot from a cell phone camera. The ease of Google Glass — portable, hands free, no fumbling for buttons — opens a whole new realm of opportunity in the digital age. The GoPro camera that straps onto objects such as a helmet is also hands-free, but the Google Glass allows for complete control of what is being captured. Although it would not be desirable for quality video in news, in a pinch, it could become any news-gatherer’s dream.

So what is causing the backlash with the public? How is recording on a Google Glass any different than whipping out a cell phone to take a quick video?

Some argue that it is because people can’t tell if they are being recorded or not. Google Glass advocates refute this by saying the Glass has a red light that turns on to indicate that it is recording.

Perhaps it is the fact that the Google Glass seems invasive by nature. The device can go wherever its owner goes and people find that type of technology more threatening than a video camera or even a cell phone.

Or maybe it’s because the Google Glass right now looks something reminiscent of a sci-fi flick.

I personally think that what it boils down to is that people are uncomfortable that they can’t easily see what the Google Glass is doing (as if it isn’t hard enough to get someone’s permission to be recorded anyway). The red recording button does exist, but it is small and definitely inconspicuous compared to a video camera or even a cell phone.

Bottom line, I think it is important to be upfront about recording people with any recording device. Google Glass is an amazing piece of technology, but the people pioneering its integration into society need to recognize the privacy concerns that arise with it.

Because if you’re ignorant about that, you’re bound to get your (Google) Glass kicked.

Media versus Venezuela

Posted on February 21, 2014 by Nicole Lopez-Alvar

The recent anti-government protests in Caracas, Venezuela, in direct protest of President Nicolas Maduro, have not only taken the country by storm, but social media as well.

Social media is uncovering the truths and lies behind what Venezuelans, and Americans, hear and see through mainstream broadcast news. Recently, former president Hugo Chavez forced a slant in media coverage, making Venezuelan broadcasters report biased and political propaganda-driven news.

This has caused the new generation of Venezuelans to take action—this time, not in a physical manner.

“I don’t trust our television and radio stations at all,” said Adriana Sanchez in a brief interview with USA Today in Caracas. “The government stations just run propaganda, while the few privately owned stations are afraid to broadcast the truth. What other options do we have?”

Many Venezuelans have resorted to Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram to stay informed and to understand the discrepancy between what they see on their television screens and what they read online. While both the government and the opposition are using social media to promote their own agendas, the truth is more readily available to citizens who need it most—including journalists.

According to the Venezuelan news website, panorama.com.ve, media outlets have been victimized by protesters and police harassing journalists on the streets.

CNN reported this week that its news crew had its cameras and transmission taken away at gunpoint.

This suppressive nature of news journalism has had a tremendous impact on what major news corporations and publications from around the world are reporting. While the chaos continues to unravel in Venezuela, news outlets such as CNN, The New York Times, BBC, and Al Jazeera English, have all had minimal coverage of Venezuela due to this lack of information.

Therefore, it has been up to Venezuelans to make a stand for their rights and their country without fighting fire with fire. From the Venezuelan-Americans of Miami to the new generation of Venezuelan descendants around the world, social media has provided more ways to uncover the truth than ever before.

Ugandan president signs anti-gay bill

Posted on February 18, 2014 by Jenna Johnson

By JENNA JOHNSON

Last week was full of proud declarations of homosexuality from prominent names and an overall positive reception from the media and society.

Early in the week, University of Missouri football lineman and potential top draft for the NFL, Michael Sam, established himself as the first openly gay player to be drafted into the NFL.

Citing Michael Sam as a “hero,” Actress Ellen Page came out as a lesbian on Valentine’s Day during a speech she gave in Las Vegas.

Both celebrities have received much support from fans and LGBT organizations such as the Human Rights Campaign. Social media exploded with congratulations and encouragement.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the world, Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni signed a bill prohibiting homosexuality.

Homosexuality is already illegal in 78 countries around the world, including much of Africa and the Middle East. Seven of these countries punish homosexuality by the death penalty. In Uganda, homosexual acts are punishable by 14 years in prison. Even organizations or individuals who reach out to counsel homosexual persons can face imprisonment.

President Museveni said he was persuaded to sign the bill, not out of political, but scientific, motivations. He claimed legalizing homosexuality poses “serious public health consequences” according to his scientific advisers.

Musevini’s advisers also assert that homosexuality is an “abnormal behavior” and not something a person is born with.

In the United States, the controversy of gay marriage legalization is always in the news media. It seems to be the “will-they, won’t they” issue of the century.

Whether or not same-sex marriage is legalized in our country, maybe it’s time to pause and enjoy the freedom of expression guaranteed to us by the Constitution.

Despite overwhelming support from the LGBT community, both Page and Sam undoubtedly received a backlash from certain anti-gay groups. Unfortunate though this is, at least they never have to face imprisonment, violence, or unemployment that the few openly gay Africans struggle against.

In my opinion, how a country reacts to the homosexual community demonstrates its degree of progressiveness. The support for LGBT causes is increasing in the United States today, especially with the younger generations. Although the gay marriage controversy remains murky, almost any American would at the very least agree with a person’s individual right to be gay.

Personal opinions aside, from a legal standpoint, Americans uphold all anti-discrimination rights. The matter of whether homosexuality is a choice does not even apply, because everyone is guaranteed the right to express him or herself.

President Obama said that if Uganda’s president passes the anti-gay bill, it will complicate relations with the east African nation. President Museveni decided to push through with the law, opting to uphold the country’s “morals” despite losing international allies.

How “moral” is it to alienate, penalize,and even torture a citizen for how he/she chooses to express love?

Uganda’s government’s behavior demonstrates unacceptable treatment of not just to the gay community, but any group. When this kind of expression is severely punished, it becomes an issue of human rights and dignity.

It’s too soon to tell how relations with Kenya will pan out after the bill passes. However, it seems from the outcry of international responses that most of the world is ready to defend the homosexual community and freedom of expression.

Print journalism is still important

Posted on February 14, 2014 by Kyla Thorpe

By KYLA THORPE

As with many college students who meet other college students, we say the same things like, “What’s your name? Where are you from? What’s your major?”

Well, being a student enrolled in the University of Miami’s School of Communication, I proudly said, “journalism,” when asked about my major.

The girl said that being a journalism major is, “nice,” but then made a comment basically telling me that I was wasting my time because print journalism will soon be unnecessary.

I really wish people would stop saying that.

Yes, I will agree with the fact that anything print will soon be deemed unnecessary and done away with. We live in an online world. It’s faster and more efficient.

What I don’t understand is why some of the fellow college students I meet keep telling me that my major is essentially a waste. They say I should go into broadcast journalism or even media management.

Here’s my response to you all: The printed newspaper is dying. The online world is thriving.

A print journalist is one who writes for a newspaper or magazine, so if the publications are moving online, print journalists will move online as well.

Maybe universities should change the name of the major to “web” journalism, but web journalists would literally be doing the same things as print journalists. They need to know how to write quickly, cover stories, and do newsgathering.

Print journalism has adapted and is flourishing online. It is in a new dimension and will, in my opinion, do very well.

Whether in print, online, or on TV, all journalists should be respected in whatever aspect he or she chooses to do and should never be told that their choice of major is unnecessary.

Time crunches and fact checking

Posted on February 7, 2014 by Kerrie Heckel

By KERRIE HECKEL

When the two bombs at the Boston Marathon went off on April 15, 2013, I was sitting in a class at my former high school, nearly 3,000 miles away. In less than half an hour, I found out about the bombing. Not from a teacher or announcement, nor a radio or television, but through a tweet sent out by CNN.

While only 8 percent of Americans use Twitter to receive news today, according to Pew research, that number is growing.

Part of the appeal is that Twitter and other online resources alike make circulating news faster now than it has ever been.

The beauty of a tweet is that journalists that have Twitter accounts can write and share a breaking story in seconds. Some will even send out a tweet directly after an interview.

Then to lessen the time frame between a journalist receiving knowledge and forwarding it to us is the matter of smartphones.

Anyone who carries a smartphone has access to these tweets in the literal palm of their hand. And it seems everyone today has a smartphone.

Business Insider estimated that about 22 percent of people in the world would own a smartphone by the end of 2013. Considering areas of the world where technology like this still isn’t available, it is reasonable to believe that if we looked only at Americans the percentage would be higher. Of course, if you’d like to see for yourself you could always glance around a college campus and try to count the number of students walking, smart phone in hand.

Simply enough, Twitter and others alike have made fast paced reporting something we’ve become accustomed to.

More and more immediacy from our news sources is something many of us expect. So, it’s no wonder why many reporters and news organizations make getting a story out quickly a top priority.

And while circulating information quickly may be important, one wonders what we lose when journalists spend less time with their stories.

According to Pew research, 75 percent of Americans don’t think journalists get their facts straight. Could this be an effect of rushed reporting?

The fact of the matter is when reporters are competing with one another to get the information out first; fact checking can take somewhat of a back seat.

This isn’t all speculation; in 2012, The New York Times asked in an Internet survey if reporters should fact check what politicians say. This question, I think brought to many peoples’ attention that fact that fact checking is no longer as important as it once was.

Many people took offense to the question and The Times received a number of sarcastic answers asking if they were joking.

What many reporters and readers may not consider is that there is a trade off between speed and fact checking. The faster a story breaks the less time was spent fact checking, where a story that may take longer to publish allows the journalist more time to fact check. This inverse relation means reporting a story quickly and thoroughly is a feat for any journalist.

However if many people are demanding both, just what exactly are journalists to do?

Is journalism still important?

Posted on November 14, 2013 by Rebecca Fernandez

By REBECCA FERNANDEZ

With news media changing faster than you can tweet, Tumble or post about it … it is hard to weigh the importance of journalism in this Digital Age.

Print journalism is going through a difficult time: facing deaths of newspapers and media outlets. Is journalism at risk as well?

Many people ask: “What is it that journalists actually do? How do we define a journalist? How is a journalist different than a blogger?” Traditionally, journalists go to the scene themselves and write, narrate, or shoot what is happening. They investigate and publish stories.

In our modern Digital Age, journalists have the ability to do more with the power of technology. We really had a hands-on experience in this through the Scavenger Hunt project in our CNJ 208 reporting class. They filter the clatter of the Internet by gathering all of the relevant articles in one story. They use these powerful new ways of communication to bring attention to important issues, whether they reported first or not. They live-blog and retweet the revolutions by introducing raw facts.

There is a need for professional journalists, not because they know how to write, but because they follow the rules and journalistic ethics, and they are competent about many topics they report on.

Journalism is still relevant, but it has definitely changed.

Journalism isn’t dying, it’s changing

Posted on November 8, 2013 by Melanie Martinez

By MELANIE MARTINEZ

Every holiday party or family get-together, it’s always the same thing. My relatives and their friends ask about boys and school. While my love life has fluctuated more than Oprah’s waistline (no offense, O) my college career has always been steady and focused. When asked about my major, I proudly reply, “Journalism,” which is always met with faces twisted in horror and concern.

“But honey, journalism is a dying career! Everybody knows that.”

Cue my usual exasperated sigh and excuse to beeline towards the snack table. I can feel their worried glances on my back. Poor thing. She needs to study a real major.

I know my Com School peers have experienced similar fright-filled responses. But do not fret my fellow journalism majors, as I’m sure you know, there is no need to switch over to something “more reliable” like engineering or accounting … we all suck at math anyways.

It is true that the journalism industry is currently going through major changes, but that doesn’t mean that it’s dying out and that reporters are going extinct.

On the contrary, BLS data shows that the number of help-wanted ads for “news analysts, reporters, and correspondents” has increased by 15 percent compared to last year. More people are telling BLS that they have careers as news analysts, reporters and correspondents compared to a year ago.

The Digital Age isn’t taking away journalism jobs, instead it’s simply modifying the description. These help-wanted ads now use words such as “digital,” “Internet” and “mobile.”

And what’s wrong with that? This isn’t the first time journalism and media have withstood major change due to technology. From the emergence of the radio in the twenties to the television takeover in the fifties, journalists have adapted when it comes to times of major change through medium.

As history shows, when technology advances and culture changes, journalists develop new skills to keep up. Journalism hasn’t died out and won’t die out because of this willingness to understand, adapt and learn.

The common idea that “everyone’s a journalist,” due to the prevalence of blogging online, is an inaccurate notion. The news and media industry needs educated journalists capable of interpreting the news and delivering it in the unique way only trained writers and broadcasters can. That’s not to say that raw talent is non-existent, but not everyone has the needed skill set acquired through education.

I believe that journalism will continue to strive in this Internet-centered period due to the fact that young journalists are capable and equipped to handle the shift. They lack the dated habits of their older counterparts and join the industry with a strong grasp of today’s environment.

Instead of collapsing careers, journalism’s changing ways are creating more jobs and opportunities, available to the people who are skilled and opened to them.

So maybe our world is studded with tablets and phones and our eyes are more constantly met with screens than with paper. We will always need people to report and interpret life’s happenings, no matter the outlet. From town crier to Tweet and everything in between, journalism has evolved along with the world and will continue to do so in the ever-changing future.

Videos as web stories: Where is the text?

Posted on November 6, 2013 by Marissa Young

By MARISSA YOUNG

The Internet is great for news because we can use it to tell stories in multiple forms, like both text and video. Video can complement and enhance text stories, adding new information and content. However, a problem I have been running into lately is having online stories that are only in video form.

For example, on CNN’s website, there are many news stories that are only video. Granted, you can find the corresponding text version elsewhere on the site, but how hard would it be for CNN to pair the two together on the same webpage?

On my Facebook News Feed, people post human-interest stories that catch my attention, but to my dismay, often the stories have no text to accompany videos. This is especially problematic when I am in a public setting, like a classroom (before class, not during…), and I am unable to watch or listen.

Sometimes, it is just an inconvenience and I can easily perform a Google search and find a text version of the story. This is generally the case with straight news stories. It’s harder when the stories are not straight news, because these are the more unique stories that cannot be found on every news website’s homepage.

Often, I don’t have the time or patience to watch a video. I’d rather have the story in front of me, where I can scan it and quickly get important details out of it. With videos, it is difficult to locate the important details, and when you try to skip around, it usually ends up taking longer to watch with all the buffering and/or freezing that ensues. Plus, videos generally require you to watch ads before the story, which is beneficial for the host site’s pockets, but is not in the interest of saving time.

Because it can be so complicated and frustrating to play videos, I usually don’t watch them at all.

Even though there are undoubtedly Internet users who prefer stories as videos, I think having a story only in video format can be detrimental to a story’s success. Having a news story only in video format will lead viewers to other websites.

And the last thing a journalist wants is to lose readers to another similar story.

Photojournalism’s future uncertain

Posted on October 20, 2013 by Melissa Mallin

By MELISSA MALLIN

Cameras are everywhere.

They fit in our pockets, they’re installed in our computers and even attached to our phones. What was once an expensive hobby has now become an affordable necessity. Because of the affordability and the availability, everyone who owns a camera considers themselves a photographer.

A professional photographer is someone who has spent his or her entire career as a photographer and has earned a living by taking pictures. A freelance photographer is a person who sells services (in this case images) to employers without a long-term commitment to them. An amateur photographer is a person who engages in photography as a hobby versus as a profession. In other words, they take pictures for fun.

A photojournalist can be defined as someone who communicates news through photographs. Think National Geographic. Until recently, a photojournalist was a full-time, paid position involving being sent out on assignment to cover a story similar to a reporter in broadcast.

Now-a-days though, many magazines and newspapers have laid off their photography departments and switched from using full-time salaried employees to using freelance and amateur photographers instead.

So what does this mean for the future of photojournalism?

Well, in order to have a future it must have a present. The day “digital” became useable and affordable marked the death of photojournalism as we know it. Why pay an employee to rush over to the scene of investigation when an amateur is already on site? Wouldn’t it be easier and cheaper to pay the amateur for the use of the images than the salary of the professional?

Photographers, like myself, who are looking to start a career in photography / photojournalism, see this as a terrible consequence of the digital age and social media.

However, others see this as liberating and evolutionary. They see the amateur photographer as liberating the professional from the role of documenting mundane, ordinary, and unexciting newsworthy events, thus allowing the professional to reiterate the true meaning behind being a photojournalist — to document and tell stories.

It is not the professional photojournalist who has died out, only the means of how they get their stories and where they publish them. Instead of reaching out to a magazine or newspaper for work, the professional photojournalist should instead become a freelance photographer and invest in a self-financed story that has not been covered in mainstream media. Then he or she can publish the work via social media outlets with the possibility of publication at a later date. Because mainstream media outlets chase provocative and sensational stories in order to drive in readership, the quality of the work has taken a backseat thus forcing professional photojournalists to self-publish.

The professional photojournalist should not cringe at the amateur photographer but should instead thank them for picking up tedious, unimportant news stories and allowing the professionals to instead, return to the art of their profession. The art of photojournalism is to document and tell stories, often hidden stories, ones mainstream media outlets tend to ignore.

For more information, visit http://www.tribemagazine.org/4/post/2013/08/the-future-of-photojournalism-part-1.html.

eBay founder starts digital news site

Posted on October 19, 2013 by Shai Fox Savariau

By SHAI FOX SAVARIAU

Pierre Omidyar, founder of eBay and billionaire, announced that he is prepared to fund a new news organization that will promote what he calls “serious journalism.”

eBay founder Pierre Omidyar wants to fund a news organization designed strictly for “serious journalism” (Photo by Joi Ito, Flickr ).

Omidyar says that he wants to create a place where journalists are able to “elevate” and are allowed to “pursue the truth.”

The goal is to make a new organization like CNN and The Washington Post, but to be founded on different principles. Investigative journalism is his main concern for this all-new, strictly digital site and he says he is ready to commit $250 million.

A journalist who is ready to jump on board is Glenn Greenwald. Greenwald is leaving Britain’s Guardian newspaper, where he became an important figure, so he can join this new online site.

Jay Rosen, professor at NYU, who has spoken to Omidyar about the project, seems supportive. He announced the news of the online site to his students and they were excited because most of them do plan on eventually getting jobs in journalism. This new site could provide many jobs for journalists looking for work and whom are interested strictly in serious journalism.

I think that this whole thing is a great idea. I’d love to see a new news organization rise, especially one that is strictly digital and that is steered towards investigative journalism, which I believe is some of the trickiest journalism.

I’d also like to see more jobs for students who are just getting their start in the journalism world. Mostly because I am a student myself and finding jobs nowadays is a nightmare.

But, I’m slightly skeptical on how well this new site will actually do. Since journalism has taken such a hit these past few years, I’m doubtful that it will become the next CNN or MSNBC. These big organizations have been around for so long and it’ll take time before this new one can catch the eye of the general public. Hopefully more important figures hop on to the production of this project and everything runs smoothly.

Here is a link to Jay Rosen’s blog with more information on the matter: http://pressthink.org/2013/10/why-pierre-omidyar-decided-to-join-forces-with-glenn-greenwald-for-a-new-venture-in-news/.

New Age reporting and getting it right

Posted on October 18, 2013 by Alexandra Silver

By ALEXANDRA SILVER

In today’s day and age, word travels fast. When a breaking news story is unfolding, journalists want to be the first on the scene and the first to receive information, causing false information to be shared with the public.

We have seen this occur many times when it comes to stories such as the Sandy Hook shootings in Connecticut. At first, the public was told there were multiple shooters, but later one we were to find out there was only one man.

The Boston Marathon bombings pointed the finger at a young male student without having hard evidence that he was the bomber, but proceeded to alert the public of this man; showing a photo and giving out his name. These mistakes are monumental and create confusion.

This is the major issue journalists face today. The pressure to present valuable information first has caused many to listen to bystanders rather than go straight to the source.

Scott Pelley, CBS Evening News anchor, openly blames the Internet for this issue journalists face, due to the fact that social media sites have caused information to spread like wildfire anytime something is shared, tweeted, or posted. Pelley stated that “we are getting big stories wrong, over and over again.”

He believes that people have too much access to the wrong information and to information in general. Pelley believes that social media sites are simply geared towards gossip, although the public does not seem to understand that concept.

These statements are true, but this trend can be reversed. As long as this toxic gossip stays out of the established newsrooms, we can prevent gossip to spread and focus on getting information straight from the source.

Should we use Twitter for our news?

Posted on October 17, 2013 by Valeria Viera

By VALERIA VIERA

Twitter is an interesting form of information source. According to the article, “The Twitter Explosion,” by Paul Farhi, “it all depends” on whether Twitter can be a useful news tool or not.

Why?

Because sometimes it is fast, newsworthy, and reachable for millions of people. But sometimes, it gives incorrect information, for example, immediately after the Boston Marathon terrorist bombing attack. Sometimes it can even give false information so damaging that it can actually destroy a person’s life.

Like the article says, Twitter is a “free social networking service that enables anyone to post pithy messages, known as tweets, to groups of self-designated followers. The tweets can be sent from and received by any kind of device — desktop, laptop, BlackBerry, cellphone.”

This is practical in one way but, in another, it also means that many people not only have fast access to the information, but also to the posting of it, even if sometimes what they post is not true. The problem with this service functioning as a news source is the fact that so many people use it nowadays and but some do not have the best intentions.

Why is Twitter different from other sources? Because it is a type of media which is utilized not only for breaking news, but for many sorts of things such as giving news about events, stores, sports, and of course for individuals who want to share their own thoughts. Anyone can post and its content is neither filtered nor edited by professional journalists.

Twitter is capable of creating conversations between different sources, provides the ability to comment, as well as the opportunity to “retweet” someone else’s posts. WIth all of these possibilities, it is easy for a rumor to be formed and rapidly be delivered to millions of people around the world.

News reporters use Twitter from any event and ‘tweet’ what is going on around them.

“Twitter can be a serious aid in reporting. Reporters now routinely tweet from all kinds of events — speeches, meetings and conferences, sports events,” said Farhi, which I believe is true but, for that same reason, people should always make sure that what they are reading is true and that it has enough evidence to support the written facts.

Thankful for the freedom to press ‘Enter’

Posted on October 11, 2013 by Melanie Martinez

By MELANIE MARTINEZ

Nowadays, just about everyone has some sort of a blog. Whether it’s light and fluffy with details about fashion or sepia-toned shots of food, or a bit deeper and serious with commentary regarding controversial issues, everyone with access to the Internet reveals who they are and what they believe.

Even if someone doesn’t have a specific blog per se, he or she is bound to have a Facebook profile, Twitter, Youtube, or Instagram account — all Web sites that let you share your opinions, personalities, thoughts, and just about anything else (yes, even the fact that you just worked out at the gym or that your niece does look pretty adorable with those bunny ears on.)

But what if you truly had to think before you pressed the Enter key?

Yesterday I came across an article on BBC about a journalist in China who was just arrested for posting about the alleged corruption of some government officials on his blog.

I immediately thought back to all the times I’ve been scrolling on my Facebook home feed and found countless posts criticizing the government. From “I wish the people in government could let go of their egos and come to an agreement” to “OBAMA SUCKS I’M MOVIN TOO CANADA.”

No matter the post, no matter the content, no matter the truth or the falsity, no matter the, ahem, spelling errors…everyone in the United States is allowed to speak their minds, provided they are not endangering anybody by doing so.

Unfortunately, the same does not go for the people in China.

After posting corruption details of some high-ranking officials onto his blog, Liu Hu, who works for the Guangzhou-based newspaper New Express, was taken by police from his home in August and was then formally arrested at the end of September. When Hu was detained by police, his posts were deleted.

Charged with defamation, analysts call the charge a speech crime, and say it is part of the government’s recent campaign to tighten control over the Internet.

The new Internet guidelines are meant to crack down on “rumor-mongering.” Many believe it is a tool being used by the ruling Communist Party to cut down criticism and control internet opinions and rumors.

In a separate case, four people were arrested for posting about government dissatisfaction on a social media forum. Several other journalists as well as a high-profile blogger have also been arrested for allegedly spreading rumors online.

Remember when President Obama was elected and people wrote posts and made memes calling him an “Islamic terrorist”? And then all those people were arrested and charged for doing so?

Yeah, me either.

So keep posting my fellow Internet-users, because whether it’s regarding your criticism of the government or your cat wearing hipster glasses, you’re safe. You’re free.

Imagine going to jail for posting this on your Facebook page.

DIGITAL NEWS REPORTING

Journalism and Media Management Department, School of Communication, University of Miami

Tag Archives: Digital journalism

Websites push us to ‘pay attention’

Violent backlash against Google Glass

Ugandan president signs anti-gay bill

Print journalism is still important

Is journalism still important?

Journalism isn’t dying, it’s changing

Videos as web stories: Where is the text?

Photojournalism’s future uncertain

eBay founder starts digital news site

Thankful for the freedom to press ‘Enter’